Speedy junior cornerback Patrick Peterson will be remembered as one of L.S.U.'s great

[TheFinisher]

It would depend on what our CB situation was at the time but yeah, I would have taken Champ Bailey that high if I'd had a need for a shut down CB at the time. However, you do bring up an interesting question. I would say that the three CBs listed above as good a shut down CBs as the NFL has had in the last 10 years or so. I mean, certainly there is room for discussion on that but I think that those three are right in the discussion. As you say, none of them were taken in the top 6 picks, though I believe Champ was top 10, why would you take Peterson, a guy I don't see as the same quality of CB prospect as either of those three that highly?

Do you see him as a shut down type CB?

Charles Woodson was the 4th pick of the 98 draft. Peterson and Woodson are clones imo, they have different games then Revis, Bailey, and Nnamdi. They are better playmakers.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

We drafted Newman #5

Have to say that I was not in favor of that. I like Newman but he never could catch the ball and I thought he was a bit too old. He's been a good player for us but I never thought he was worth the 5th overall pick.

 

[TheFinisher]

Hello Finisher, Welcome to the Board. I hope you enjoy it.

I think it kinda depends on how big he actually is. If he's really 220 lbs, as some have stated on this board, then I just don't see him being a CB. If he's 20 years old or so and he's already that big, even if he's 210, he's probably going to get bigger and it's going to be hard for him to play CB at the size he's likely to grow into.

Charles Woodson might be a good comparison. If he's a Darren Woodson or a Rod Woodson, I would be very pleased but I don't know if I would take him at 6 overall. I guess a lot will depend on his combine. See just how fast he is, just how good his latteral movement, his hips and his agilities really are and what his real size and weight are.

Thank you for the welcome.

I just see Peterson's best fit as a S, if you put him at CB you're taking away his best assests. The CB position is not as valuable as it once was, especially with the modern NFL moving more towards the spread and every team has 1 to 2 athletic TEs who LBs can't cover. Shutting down teams #1 WR is overrated, the Jets-Pats game a few weeks ago is a great example of this. Great defenses have a difference maker at the Safety position, you can disguise coverages easier at the Safety position and guys like Polamalu, Reed, etc. must be accounted for by the offense on every play because of their game changing ability. Peterson is that type of player.

 

[TheFinisher]

Have to say that I was not in favor of that. I like Newman but he never could catch the ball and I thought he was a bit too old. He's been a good player for us but I never thought he was worth the 5th overall pick.

Would you have taken Charles Woodson at 5?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Charles Woodson was the 4th pick of the 98 draft. Peterson and Woodson are clones imo, they have different games then Revis, Bailey, and Nnamdi. They are better playmakers.

I see more Woody then Charles Woodson. Woodson was electric at Michigan. He could do it all. More physical in the run game, better on the ball, better man to man skills, could return kicks and play offense. I don't think Peterson is Charles Woodson but I have not watched Peterson nearly as much as I did Charles Woodson while at Michigan so maybe I'm wrong.

 

[kmd24]

Because I have not seen that kind of skill set at CB from him. As I have said, earlier, he looks like a better Zone Coverage guy as opposed to man to man shut down CB. I mean, I'm just basing this off of what I have personally seen. It's not anything more then that.

You've got it exactly backwards, IMO. I've watched all but a handful of LSU games over the last two years (all but McNeese St. and ULM in 2010 and ULL, La Tech, and Tulane in 2009), and, to me, Peterson is much better in press coverage than zone. He's got good zone instincts, but he freelances a little too much in zone coverage and doesn't always honor his assignment.

He's got some flaws in man coverage, but he's very good - to the point that he rarely was tested by opposing QB's.

 

[TheCount]

It would depend on what our CB situation was at the time but yeah, I would have taken Champ Bailey that high if I'd had a need for a shut down CB at the time. However, you do bring up an interesting question. I would say that the three CBs listed above as good a shut down CBs as the NFL has had in the last 10 years or so. I mean, certainly there is room for discussion on that but I think that those three are right in the discussion. As you say, none of them were taken in the top 6 picks, though I believe Champ was top 10, why would you take Peterson, a guy I don't see as the same quality of CB prospect as either of those three that highly?

Do you see him as a shut down type CB?

I want him as a safety, so if you're asking me if I see him as being comparable to other safeties taken that high (Eric Berry, Laron Landry, Antrell Rolle, Sean Taylor), then yes, I do think he's worth a Top 7 selection as a safety prospect.

If you're asking me if I see him as Champ Bailey, then no, they aren't the same sort of players physically or style wise.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Thank you for the welcome.

I just see Peterson's best fit as a S, if you put him at CB you're taking away his best assests. The CB position is not as valuable as it once was, especially with the modern NFL moving more towards the spread and every team has 1 to 2 athletic TEs who LBs can't cover. Shutting down teams #1 WR is overrated, the Jets-Pats game a few weeks ago is a great example of this. Great defenses have a difference maker at the Safety position, you can disguise coverages easier at the Safety position and guys like Polamalu, Reed, etc. must be accounted for by the offense on every play because of their game changing ability. Peterson is that type of player.

I think it depends on what scheme you run. If your Philly, then CBs are extremely valuable. If your Tampa Bay, the Safeties are more valuable. If you play more man scheme or if you play zone, cover 2 or Tampa 2 in particular. Then you have more of a premium on Safeties.

However, in todays NFL, you can't have just a guy playing either Safety position or he will get isolated and beaten. I think Safety is much more of a premium position then it was back in the day but, I don't know that it's more important then a true shut down CB. If you have that guy, then you can play two thirds of the field with 10 guys and that's a significant advantage.

We need a Safety in the worst way. Many of our defensive failures these past few seasons can be directly traced back to our Safety play. However, it's a bit of a risk to take this guy at 6 when he's never played the position IMO. I don't know if I'd do that or not. As I said earlier, much depends on his combine for me.

 

[TheFinisher]

I see more Woody then Charles Woodson. Woodson was electric at Michigan. He could do it all. More physical in the run game, better on the ball, better man to man skills, could return kicks and play offense. I don't think Peterson is Charles Woodson but I have not watched Peterson nearly as much as I did Charles Woodson while at Michigan so maybe I'm wrong.

Peterson does all of that just as well as Charles Woodson, his return skills are top notch he returned 2 punts for TDs this year and I think he averaged something like 30 yards per return on INTs. I highly recommend everyone here to watch LSU's bowl game in the coming days, he's the real deal.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Would you have taken Charles Woodson at 5?

I guess that's the same answer as before. Would depend on if I needed a CB but assuming I did, then yes, I probably would have taken Woodson at 5 if he were a big need.

However, I don't think this guy is a Charles Woodson. I think he's a Safety.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

You've got it exactly backwards, IMO. I've watched all but a handful of LSU games over the last two years (all but McNeese St. and ULM in 2010 and ULL, La Tech, and Tulane in 2009), and, to me, Peterson is much better in press coverage than zone. He's got good zone instincts, but he freelances a little too much in zone coverage and doesn't always honor his assignment.

He's got some flaws in man coverage, but he's very good - to the point that he rarely was tested by opposing QB's.

Well, you've got me at a disadvantage then. I have watched LSU no more then maybe 6 or 7 times over the last two years. I just can't say that Peterson ever struck me as a shutdown CB.

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

ABQ is right, IMO.

Again, as a pure Cornerback prospect, Prince >>>>>>>>>>> Peterson.

From what I have seen, Prince has the potential to be a complete shutdown corner. I do not see that from Peterson. What I do see is a cornerback who takes chances. He'll jump routes, good instincts, but he'll get beat.

Basically, I think Petersons ceiling is Asante Samuel. I think Princes is a Revis type player. Both good players, both different skillsets. It depends what you as fans want. But Peterson is not what a lot of people here seem to think. If anything, Prince is that guy.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Peterson does all of that just as well as Charles Woodson, his return skills are top notch he returned 2 punts for TDs this year and I think he averaged something like 30 yards per return on INTs. I highly recommend everyone here to watch LSU's bowl game in the coming days, he's the real deal.

Sounds like good advice. I will definitely watch that game. Thanks for your input. I get much more out of discussions when you actually discuss the players as opposed to argue back and fourth.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I want him as a safety, so if you're asking me if I see him as being comparable to other safeties taken that high (Eric Berry, Laron Landry, Antrell Rolle, Sean Taylor), then yes, I do think he's worth a Top 7 selection as a safety prospect.

If you're asking me if I see him as Champ Bailey, then no, they aren't the same sort of players physically or style wise.

Do you feel comfortable taking him as high as 6 if he has to make the change from CB to Safety, a position he's never played before?

 

[Doomsday101]

Sorry I don't see any team drafting Peterson in the top 5 then moving him to safety. You want a safety draft one

 

[JBS]

ABQ is right, IMO.

Again, as a pure Cornerback prospect, Prince >>>>>>>>>>> Peterson.

From what I have seen, Prince has the potential to be a complete shutdown corner. I do not see that from Peterson. What I do see is a cornerback who takes chances. He'll jump routes, good instincts, but he'll get beat.

Basically, I think Petersons ceiling is Asante Samuel. I think Princes is a Revis type player. Both good players, both different skillsets. It depends what you as fans want. But Peterson is not what a lot of people here seem to think. If anything, Prince is that guy.

I will admit that I haven't seen enough of PRince, however, i have seen a few instances on deep balls (Ok st game vs Blackmon) where Prince was completely lost on playing the deep ball. I have seen too much of this from our DBS over the years. Does Prince have this problem too? I sure hope not.

 

[ZeroClub]

Lots of high quality posts in this one, ABQ.

A pleasure to read.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

ABQ is right, IMO.

Again, as a pure Cornerback prospect, Prince >>>>>>>>>>> Peterson.

From what I have seen, Prince has the potential to be a complete shutdown corner. I do not see that from Peterson. What I do see is a cornerback who takes chances. He'll jump routes, good instincts, but he'll get beat.

Basically, I think Petersons ceiling is Asante Samuel. I think Princes is a Revis type player. Both good players, both different skillsets. It depends what you as fans want. But Peterson is not what a lot of people here seem to think. If anything, Prince is that guy.

Except Peterson has the speed to recover if he did bite on something. Not to mention the size to jam his man and completely disrupt the timing of the play. Even a QB as bad as Eli, once in rhythm, can kill you. A guy like Peterson can completely change that w/ either a nasty jam at the LOS, a big hit, or a pick-6.

Terrence Newman is a guy who has covered players well for years. Thats nice, but it doesnt turn games around in an instant. Peterson can cover guys well all game and at the same time scare the hell out of QB's and WR's. He would have a big time impact on our defense

 

[CanuckCowboysFan]

I will admit that I haven't seen enough of PRince, however, i have seen a few instances on deep balls (Ok st game vs Blackmon) where Prince was completely lost on playing the deep ball. I have seen too much of this from our DBS over the years. Does Prince have this problem too? I sure hope not.

honestly, Prince didn't play as bad as many people think. People look at the boxscore and think he had a horrid game, IMO he didn't. He got beat, OK. He did not get torched though. That game, Blackmon only had 5 receptions, his lowest all year. A huge chunk of that came on a trick play where Prince was initially in good position, but Blackmon came down with it. It's very hard to defend that play. He only got beat deep on that play, and when he interfered with Justin which prevented a 60 yard TD, which was actually a smart play. On another deep play, he was in good position, he just slipped at the very end.All the other completions were short where Prince immediately made the tackle.

On the year, passes to his receiver are only completed something like 35% of the time. I don't remember the exact quote. Its something around there though. Thats very good. He has all the potential to be a shutdown guy IMO. He's also had an unlucky year in terms of INT's. I know 2 of his picks have been called back due to penalties. But he's not a guy that gets abused on the deep ball. No way.

 

[TheCount]

Do you feel comfortable taking him as high as 6 if he has to make the change from CB to Safety, a position he's never played before?

I can't be comfortable with any pick that high till after the combine, but I think all the tools are there. He wouldn't be the first CB to make that transition into the NFL.

My first choice is still Nick Fairley but I would be pleased with Peterson.